Books > Law > International law > Public international law > International law of transport & communications > International maritime law
|
Buy Now
The International Court of Justice and Maritime Disputes - The Case of Chile and Peru (Paperback)
Loot Price: R725
Discovery Miles 7 250
|
|
The International Court of Justice and Maritime Disputes - The Case of Chile and Peru (Paperback)
Series: Routledge Research on the Law of the Sea
Expected to ship within 12 - 17 working days
|
The origins of the maritime dispute between Chile and Peru go back
to 1952, when these countries, along with Ecuador, asserted
sovereignty over 200 nautical miles from their coasts. This
maritime claim is widely regarded as one of the most important
contributions by a group of developing countries to the law of the
sea. Peru then asked the Court of International Justice to delimit
its lateral boundary with Chile in accordance with principles of
international law. Chile asked the Court to dismiss the request.
The question before the ICJ Justice was whether the treaty
concluded by the parties when they made their claim had also
delimited their lateral boundary. This book provides a critical
analysis of the approach to treaty interpretation by the
International Court of Justice in Maritime Disputes. Focusing on
the case of Chile and Peru, the book explores two main issues: the
interpretation of the Santiago Declaration and its connected
treaties; and the tacit agreement that established a lateral
maritime boundary with a seaward extension of 80 nautical miles.
Part I argues that the Court's finding that the Santiago
Declaration did not delimit the lateral boundary is mistaken
because it ignores its context, as well as its object and purpose.
Part II argues that the finding that the parties had entered into a
tacit agreement is an unjustified legal inference derived from a
hasty interpretation of the Special Agreement of 1954. It questions
that the reliability of the evidence used to determine the seaward
extent of the lateral boundary and argues that the Court failed to
demonstrate the bearing of contemporaneous developments in the law
of the sea on the content of the tacit agreement.
General
Is the information for this product incomplete, wrong or inappropriate?
Let us know about it.
Does this product have an incorrect or missing image?
Send us a new image.
Is this product missing categories?
Add more categories.
Review This Product
No reviews yet - be the first to create one!
|
You might also like..
|
Email address subscribed successfully.
A activation email has been sent to you.
Please click the link in that email to activate your subscription.